» News

Erick Erickson of RedState Bans “Birthers” and “Truthers” From His Blog

Home - by - February 13, 2010 - 04:36 America/New_York - 57 Comments

Well, anyone can do anything they’d like with their blog, I just don’t understand what the link is between birthers and truthers. I don’t hang out at Red State, so I really couldn’t say for sure, but was there really a problem with truthers in the comments section? Or was this a not so subtle way to conflate a truly deranged group of people, the truthers, with birthers, a group largely composed of people who are accurate when they say that the president has too much personal secrecy?

It has also been my experience that truthers are most predominantly left-wing, hating Bush, or even America, so much so that they believe he was behind 9/11. I ‘m sure there are people who hate Obama as much, and they would believe and advocate for just about anything that would get him thrown out of office. But that is not the case for many people who are reasonably concerned that Obama was not properly vetted. They should remain silent or be banned from Red State as well?

In Erickson’s post announcing his decision he continually called these people “birfers,” rather than the slightly less insulting term “birthers.” He has also said that it’s imperative to keep these loonies away from the Tea Party Movement, in the belief that Tea Baggers, as they are called by the left, are going to be taken seriously if they purge themselves of the birthers. The Tea Party Movement will gain respectability from the left the day they all throw themselves off a cliff into a jagged abyss. I never fail to marvel at people on the right that fail to see this. If you are conservative, you’re already nuts as far as the left is concerned, whether you are a birther or not.

This is a comment left by a man named Bob Frazier who I feel puts this in it’s proper perspective.

Red state can certaintly take this stance, and its probably a wise move. Those that believe the US government had something to do with the world trade center are not nuts, but they just hate America and what it stands for. Those that believe Obama might be ineligible for president probably will get nowhere with this whether true or not. So best to move to other issues.

However, using words like crazies and nuts to describe those who question Obama’s eligibility does Red State and many of the contributors a disservice. These people care about the Constitution. That makes them nuts? Likely nothing will come of their concern but why insult them? You can disagree without that. You really want to compare them to people who proclaim Washington brought down the Twin Towers? You can say it keeps us from moving in other directions. But again it looks like we are scared to death what the left thinks of us.

I wish you had written this a bit differently. When it comes to the so called “birthers” they at least care about their country and the Constitution. That cannot be said of the so called “truthers”. Lets be professional about it. Red State can do better.

I have the utmost respect for Erick Erickson, and what he has accomplished. He is among the top bloggers in the country and runs a very influential and smart site. I would trust him as the steward shaping the Tea Party Movement. I agree with his desire to distance himself from groups he doesn’t want to be associated with. I just wish he didn’t call birthers crazy. I think that’s a mischaracterization.

» 57 Comments

  1. Diann

    February 13th, 2010

    I was just on Red State and read the post and the subsequent emails he received. I think it was a preemptive strike to be honest. The MSM is going to focus on the kook fringe every time. It’s the only way to stigmatize the Tea Party movement and to call into question even legitimate criticisms of Obama. It’s his site. He can do what he wants, I guess. But you’re right. Calling them crazy is no better than the Dems tossing people under the bus to make sure none of the shit stick to them. We need to be better than that.

    Thumb up +6

     
  2. Steve

    February 13th, 2010

    You’re right that disengaging from the Birthers won’t improve the image of the “teabaggers” in the eyes of the Progressive left. But those people are going to vote Democrat/Left no matter what happens.

    And painting the Birther’s as “crazy” is perhaps not quite as effective a tactic as calling them consipiracy theorists. Which is just another word for “crazy”, but the MSM will use the Birther crowd to try and sway independent/apathetic voters away from the Tea Party movement, if they can be linked. That I suspect is the motive here.

    The Birther movement will never gain any traction because the MSM will never ever investigate. The Birthers are asking legitimate questions, I agree, but no good can ever come of it. What do they think is going to happen? Is Barack Obama or the leftist-radical controlled congress going to appoint a special investigator to get to the bottom of this matter? Do they really think that he’s going to be proven ineligible before 2012 (which is when I expect the American electorate to rise up and toss his sorry ass out of the White House anyway).

    It’s a wasted effort, it smells like a conspiracy theory, and thus it does no good, and it can only harm the Tea Party movement, in terms of being taken seriously by non-partisans.

    Thumb up +2

     
  3. MoeTom

    February 13th, 2010

    I am curious about Obama’s school years. Why the secrecy? Nothing from Columbia or Harvard. Columbia says he graduated in 1983, but under what name? There is something sinister in the air and a pinch of truth could easily clear it up. Secrecy
    leads to speculation, rumor, and conspiracy stuff.
    Then there is george Soros!!

    Noteworthy Comment Thumb up +10

     
  4. MoeTom

    February 13th, 2010

    One thing is certain. The media has let us down.

    Thumb up +8

     
  5. Carbon Pootprint

    February 13th, 2010

    The birther movement was started by Hillary backers back during the primaries. I first read about it back then on a site called No Quarter run by a guy named Larry Johnson. A former CIA/State Dept. employee and “an expert” the lame stream media would bring on to bash Bush. I always felt like it was a leftover democrat turd best left laying on the ground.

    Thumb up 0

     
  6. Matt

    February 13th, 2010

    Where was Douchey Doucherton born?
    A)Island Paradise
    B)African shithole
    C)Who gives a shit,its too late to worry about it

    For some reason the answer is always “C”

    But Erick Erickson has lost me. That post was arrogant and divisive. You wont see the Left tossing the Truthers out. What the hell is his point? I want to see SOME F&*King thing that says theat SOMETHING that Obama has claimed is true.
    Want me out of the Tea Party for that??
    FINE. I will roll up my yellow Flags and stop taking days off work and driving all over the F*&KING STATE. I will also PUT AWAY MY WALLET,ASSHAT.
    I thought the movement was something else entirely. I was wrong.

    Thumb up +7

     
  7. Johhny Freedom

    February 13th, 2010

    It’s true that the birthers and truthers include numbers of Klansmen, skinheads, and other ultra-lefties as well.

    Thumb up 0

     
  8. Brian

    February 13th, 2010

    The problem with birthers is that they are using some legitimate facts about the suppression of information to support a widly implausible idea –that Mama O actually traveled 10,000 miles to Kenya to give birth to a child in a third world country, rather than go down the street to a hospital in Honolulu.

    We’re talking about 1961, when you could still die in childbirth, especially ina third world country. Moreover, was it even possible to go from Hawaii to Kenya in 1961? Even if it were, it would have been a hell of an ordeal for a pregnant woman. Who would have done such a thing?

    Here is an article from American Thinker, by one of their best writers, Jack Cashill, that gives some far more plausible reasons for hiding the original birth certificate — none of which involve being born outside the US

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/another_look_at_obamas_origins.html

    Thumb up +3

     
  9. Elektra

    February 13th, 2010

    Wait just a second, Matt. One thing, EE is NOT the leader of the TEA Party. Not fair to blame the them/us for something one person says, no matter who that person is. There isn’t any kind of ‘effort’ going on to out See Thru, just a certain amount of people who are not afraid to wonder aloud why there was such an orchestrated effort to hide half this Joker’s life. That’s what was banned. It’s a shame that EE succumbed to the left’s skewed equivalencies.

    Erickson is a wee bit more influential than you’re giving him credit for, but you are correct that his view shouldn’t dissuade anyone from going to a Tea Party and speaking their mind. I cringe at a lot of the signs at Tea Parties, but it’s called the First Amendment. I applaud Erickson in this respect, I always look for someone credible on the left to denounce the signs I see on Zombie times. No one ever does.
    At least Erickson has made the overture on the part of the right. I think the overture went too far calling the people “crazy.”
    What’s next? He caves to the mounting pressure from the left that accuses anti-Obama speech racist?
    New edict at Red State – you can discuss conservative policies but you can’t denigrate Obama’s in the process!
    -bfh

    Thumb up +3

     
  10. cakes

    February 13th, 2010

    The real important point, that everyone seems to have lost, is that Obama has not provided the information. If he had, the accusations will go away. Now, he is either hiding info that he needs to keep secret, or he is keeping it a mystery to create a right wing ‘pin cushion’. Personally, while I think he is cunning and his puppet masters even more so, I do not believe the latter because they had counted on using Bush in that capacity for the next 8 years. Therefore, I think it is the former- he is hiding *something*. Does that make me a birther? Absolutely not- I have no idea what it is he is hiding and frankly, the state of Hawaii was in its infancy at the time, so birth records cannot be held to the standards of Delaware at the time, which may make that one accusation MOOT. What is NOT in question, is that there is information/history that could be relevant to Obama’s character and mindset that all other modern day candidates and Presidents have released for public consumption.
    This man was elected based on these things: race, hatred of Bush, and general platitudes (change). Considering the negligence of the MSM in investigating/reporting this man’s background and the drips and drabbles of information that did come out that would affirm Obama’s character (Rev. Wright and his comment to redistribute wealth) did NOT gain traction or alter his course in any way, it is logical for one to assume there is something in his records that is MORE damaging to the man than those examples, or they would have released the info.
    Frankly, IMHO, I do not think, short of being a murderer, any info would have prevented Obama’s victory. The mood of the country was anti-Republican and driven by the ‘feeling’ that each voter could prove how ‘hip’ and non-racist they are. But now, the ‘pat myself on the back’ feeling is waning and people are wondering what exactly did they vote into office? How is that radical?

    Thumb up +3

     
  11. BigFurHat

    February 13th, 2010

    In my best Kennedy impersonation:

    Truthers see what is right there and say NOT,
    Birthers see what is NOT there and say WHY NOT?

    I think the former can be called crazy,
    I think the latter are legitimately frustrated with the
    glossing over and whitewashing done at the behest of
    the president.

    I’ve said many times, I am not a birther. I, just like Erick Erickson, am not going to waste my time on something that is never going to amount to anything – but I don’t care if there are people who want to pursue this.
    How is that depleting MY RESOURCES?

    Garofalo and company calls the Tea Party names and Erickson responds with insults and divisiveness?
    I’d say round one goes to Garofalo.
    I’m sure now that he has his house in order they will give him a hearty thumbs up.
    Until they demand Sarah Palin be thrown under the bus.

    Thumb up +3

     
  12. ed

    February 13th, 2010

    @elektra – that’s the big question “why there was such an orchestrated effort to hide half this Joker’s life” that keeps getting lost. I for one think he was born here but I can’t get past the fact that he would not release his bona fides and shut everybody up. You either have something to hide or you don’t. I also have a big problem with O’s trip to Pak-e-stahn when there was a travel ban for US citizens! Something is wrong here and to dismiss it without question or explaination is criminal.

    Thumb up +4

     
  13. Matt

    February 13th, 2010

    Electra,My thoughts on the Movement were that it was a leaderless massive organism that was DEMANDING that Washington listen. We were leaderless because we stood for the Constitution and nothing else. Now on every soap box there is someone trying to speak for us. We do not NEED a self appointed leader. and we certainly do not need one who has a throat full of MSM.
    Maybe this will get Erick invited to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom. Thats the usual award for helping the President

    Thumb up +5

     
  14. Reiuxcat

    February 13th, 2010

    Thanks for posting the AT link Brian. For some reason I hadn’t read that one yet.

    Thumb up +1

     
  15. Matt

    February 13th, 2010

    Perhaps Erick can change the nameto “Purple State” and he can weed out everyone else that does not agree with him on every subject.
    What a freaking asshole.
    Just what we DID NOT NEED RIGHT NOW. Erickson the Divider.
    CEEERRRIST,This pisses me off.

    Thumb up +2

     
  16. BigFurHat

    February 13th, 2010

    That’s an aspect that unnerved me a bit.
    The right IS GAINING TRACTION. They are winning illogical bell weather elections.
    This had all the timing of an epileptic jazz band.

    Thumb up +5

     
  17. Matt

    February 13th, 2010

    And I go read the comments and they are throwing dirt on the people who do not agree with them on every subject. Just what is to be gained?
    This is like a football coach cutting half his team because he thinks they are bad at piano.
    He will lose the rest of his games but the Music Department will cheer wildly as he strolls down the hall.

    Thumb up +6

     
  18. cakes

    February 13th, 2010

    @Matt- ala LGF? Let’s hope it doesn’t go that far. The main complaint I have had with the repubs is that they refuse to fight. They (still) want to be looked upon as ‘above the fray’, more ‘dignified’, etc. BS! That hasn’t worked in their favor for a decade. Repubs are now gaining traction mostly because the people are feeling they were sold a bill of goods with Obama and the Dems. (to which I still say, boo f’n hoo- they were warned, but did not take heed)
    Playing ‘nice’ doesn’t go very far in this political climate- especially for the right. The MSM doesn’t report on how ‘civilized’ the right is when accusations are hurled at them. BDS became so deep and so widespread because he did not defend himself from falsehood and/or extreme spin from the left. The right needs to learn that there are times to remain classy, there are also times when defending yourself with the truth is mandatory.

    Thumb up +3

     
  19. DeniseVB

    February 13th, 2010

    I think Erick also bans pro-choice conservatives who believe abortion should be safe, legal, rare and between a woman and her doctor. Scott Brown is pro-choice, wonder how RedState treated him?

    Thumb up +1

     
  20. BigFurHat

    February 13th, 2010

    Denise,
    Is that true???
    Seriously. Can you validate that stance with evidence?
    I am extremely interested in knowing this for sure.

    Thumb up +3

     
  21. Doc

    February 13th, 2010

    So what’s the big deal…so a bunch of crazy people take over a site and….wait…that sound like us!

    Never Mind!!!

    Thumb up +3

     
  22. Reiuxcat

    February 13th, 2010

    Hey Doc,

    where do you tan anyway? Or is that spray on?

    Thumb up 0

     
  23. Joe

    February 13th, 2010

    IMHO, most of the pure Birthers are conservatives, most of the pure Truthers are ultra-liberals, but there is a large contingent of Birther-Truthers in the libertarian and Paulnut category, and many of them are white supremacists and who knows what else to boot.

    What these groups all have in common is the desire to repeatedly and obnoxiously post their “questions” in blog postings about other topics. “These are important questions that must be answered!” So why don’t you get off your butt and go research them, instead of bugging people who aren’t interested and don’t believe your conspiracy theory?

    Thumb up 0

     
  24. Snowball the Sour Puss

    February 13th, 2010

    Well, to me, Obama keeping his birth certificate hidden is just yet another weak-link in his ever thining suit of armor. Besides, he’s Wag the Dog redux. He’s a marionette controlled by corruption, greed, and power. And the SOB knows it! We all know it too and dammit all!, he had better start realizing that we know he knows! I predict that in 5 years, when Obama is nothing more than a really, really, really bad memory, his house of cards will have toppled and every ugly secret will be revealed. By then I’m planning on not really giving much of a shit what dirty lies he told and who all covered for him anyway. It won’t matter because we’ll all have know these things 5 years earlier. Fresh headlines for the Obamaphiles, old news to the rest of us.

    ~

    As for Erick Erickson, I’ve never had a need nor much of a desire to visit Red State so I can’t comment on his latest post; I trust all the different thoughts you good folk offer. I can say, however, with great certainty, that I have always been a huge fan and avid supporter of Erickson’s Eight Stages of Psycho-social Developmental Crisis’ theory. I believe he was onto something very brilliant with that theory.

    Thumb up +1

     
  25. Elektra

    February 13th, 2010

    I hear ya, bfh. I’ll continue to denigrate Marxist Socialist policies no matter who happens to be pushing them. I was against them when I heard about how Hitler utilized them, when Saul Alinsky wrote about them and when they were the policies of Ted Kennedy, Billary, Algore, etc. I applaud you for allowing free thinking iOTW.

    Right, Matt. I heard Ann Coulter opine that there wasn’t anyone to even contact if you want to get in touch with the movement. It is it’s own entity and no truth lover (one who seeks truth and accepts it for what it is) should be eradicated.

    The B-Cast @ Breitbart has an interview with one of Bammy’s Occidental buddies. This is a first look into, at least, that piece of himself’s life back then. It’s interesting. I guess he was bound and gagged in 2008. heh No matter. Check it. He seems credible beyond saying he ‘tried’ to get his story out before.
    I wonder how many posters EE has actually had to ban…

    Thumb up +3

     
  26. Comrade Whoopie

    February 13th, 2010

    The difference between birthers and truthers is that one denies what we all saw on 9-11 with our own eyes, while the other merely states that “we don’t know the facts because we haven’t seen the evidence.”

    I’ll leave it you to decide which of the two theorists are more credible and reasonable.

    Thumb up +4

     
  27. Doc

    February 13th, 2010

    RCat…I use a combination of Baby Oil and Iodine then lay under a 300Watt incandesent lamp for 15 min. or until I can smell my fur singe.

    Thumb up +2

     
  28. Elektra

    February 13th, 2010

    We all come to our end at the truth. Find that end at every decision and stand. The end of the ‘truther’ position is obfuscation on the part of the Won. I stand there willing to research to any end (with proper fundage, of course) and accept what eventually comes out. I see nothing wring with that.

    Thumb up +2

     
  29. Chris

    February 13th, 2010

    Sounds like red state is headed down the same road as little green booger-balls.

    Thumb up +6

     
  30. Brian

    February 13th, 2010

    OK everyone listen up as i tell you what the real point is.

    This is a case of “a bridge too far.” There is compelling evidence that something ain’t right. Why does someone spend huge amount of resources to hide his certified birth certificate? For no reason at all? Makes no sense. But the fundamental story that birthers have been trying to prove is also crazy.

    Ladies, help me out here. Would any pregnant woman in her right mind board a prop plane for a trip that would have taken two days in order to deliver a baby in a third world country. No father would demand it. No set of grandparents would allow it. So when birthers either insist this happened or try to rationalize away this problem they sound crazy. Which meant that it was necessary for people concerned about the image of conservatism to distance themselves from the story.

    But now there are far more plausible reasons for explainig O’s behaviour. One story is that O is the child of his grandfather and a black prostitute. That story has plausibility because Obama himself wrote about his grandfather taking him to Honolulu’s red light district and of Gramp’s fondness for ladies of the melanin enhanced persuasion. And you would certainly want to cover this story up.

    Like I say, before you argue this issue any further, you ought to look at the Jack Cashill article. It changes the terms of this debate. But it also means that Barry O is a natural born citizen.

    Thumb up +3

     
  31. mark

    February 13th, 2010

    Snowball you stole a bit of my thunder. But saved me some time. I’m more focused right now on keeping the asshat in chief from f’ing up our country anymore than he has already. After we vote his ass out based on his policies (that is important) we can find out what a sham he was and kill two birds with one stone:

    1. Socialism and leftyness will have taken a huge blow as their policies are rejected by huge margins all over this country in 2010 and 2012.
    2. MSM will have taken a huge blow by having their lassitude and willful ignorance will have been shown to allow a fraud into office (that is assuming he is)

    Either way, Erick can do as he pleases, and I’m sure we don’t have all the information for his decision. Often, BFH will post something with a certain slant and I wonder what the hell he’s doing. Then as we comment and he comments I learn. That is a trait that is not common on the left or in the MSM (I know same place, but it is a different segment).

    Just sayin’ ..

    Thumb up +1

     
  32. Vermont Woodchuck

    February 13th, 2010

    I think some research is in order people. The actual origin of the Birthers comes from the Hillary campaign when she still had some hope of beating Obama.
    The PUMA crowd started the rumor in hopes of unsettling the upstart supporters of the Messiah.
    The crucifixion failed.
    Chase it around for yourselves.
    http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Entertainers4OBAMA/gGx4Fr
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=69294

    Thumb up +4

     
  33. BigFurHat

    February 13th, 2010

    Mark,
    If you’re learning from me there is something seriously wrong with you!
    Kidding aside. This site is FOR the commenters. The contributors do their thing, we make funny pictures, write provocative posts, we voice an opinion or two, we can get just as passionate as some of the readers, that’s our right.
    But there is no edict, “tow this line or you’re banned!!!”
    In my opinion a good blog is one where the content is put up merely to become a vehicle for conversation and opinion.
    If you’re going to shut out opinions that you don’t agree with what the hell are you doing? Creating a shrine to your own beliefs? It seems terribly douchewaddish to me.
    I can’t help but think that the Little Green Football Syndrome is a combination of paranoia, ego, and a belief that your blog is something that needs daily pruning until it looks like a topiary of yourself. Good blogs belong to everyone.
    HINT: The name of this blog is iOwnTheWorld.
    I doesn’t mean me, or Hippie, or Lori etc.
    It means everybody. Each of us.

    Thumb up +7

     
  34. mark

    February 13th, 2010

    BFH .. there’s all kinds of “learnin’”. You know, learning what to do and what NOT to do …

    I report you decide…

    Thumb up 0

     
  35. Snowball the Sour Puss

    February 13th, 2010

    @Brian – I agree, there is no pregnant woman in her right mind that would board a prop plane for a trip that would take two days in order to deliver a baby in a third world country. Absolutely not.

    No, she hopped in a transporter at Doctor Evil’s Lair deep in the heart of Mauna Kea and was beamed across the ocean via “laser” where she gave birth in a mud hut somewhere in Kenya. She named her son Obama which means “Crooked Mud Hut” in Dholuo.

    Look it up dude! :) :)

    Thumb up +2

     
  36. BigFurHat

    February 13th, 2010

    Agreed. And honestly, I want my opinions changed by a good argument. I’m not so stupid to think that all my ideas have to be the right ones. But, I will never concede one inch to Lori.No matter how good her argument.
    THAT won’t happen, just on principle!!!!!

    Thumb up 0

     
  37. Snowball the Sour Puss

    February 13th, 2010

    I come to iOTW to expand my mentalness.

    And to laugh.

    Thumb up +2

     
  38. BigFurHat

    February 13th, 2010

    Snowball,
    Your post brilliantly portrays a crazy birther.
    My problem with the Red State position is that he’s somehow lumped in people who demand more transparency on documents other than just the birth certificate.
    Why take a position against the FOI act, and call the people who demand transparency from their president “crazy?”
    What’s this “other ball” Erickson is focusing on that is as important as THAT issue?
    And can’t we walk and chew gum at the same time?

    Thumb up +1

     
  39. mark

    February 13th, 2010

    He feels he is coming from a position of purity. I’ve never been to his blog, but his twitter profile says in part “We fight the left and clean up the right”

    Who appointed him?

    Thumb up +3

     
  40. Snowball the Sour Puss

    February 13th, 2010

    I think BFH, that somewhere in your reply to Mark, you may have already answered your own question. I haven’t anything to offer more than what you thought aloud. Maybe he thinks the title Maverick would make him sound really cool. I don’t know. All’s I know is that the whole patting my head – rubbing my belly thing really eff’s up my head and gives me static-hair-head.

    Thumb up 0

     
  41. Zonga

    February 13th, 2010

    The Tea Party is a big tent.

    If you know anybody between the age of 13 and 30 bet they know this song. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_AmODZdwwM Lots of old peeps will recognize it too but they are prolly just Paultards.

    If you were not involved in the Tea Party since ’07 but have joined since ’09 thank goodness you got better – the thing is, the welfaretards/warfaretards might be trying to own it. Big mistake. We already have enough warfare/welfare parties.

    The Tea Party is a big tent.

    Thumb up 0

     
  42. Matt

    February 13th, 2010

    Beating the dead horse here but I am still astonished by this. I never posted there because I dont like registering for sites but I frequently read there….SO.Let me ask.
    You need help painting a fence,I offer to help.
    You dont like the fact that I think that “House” is a better show than “Mercy” so you decide I cannot help you.

    Thumb up +3

     
  43. reeko

    February 13th, 2010

    “natural born citizen” has nothing to do with “birthers” or any birth certificate, real or imaginary.

    he was born in Hawaii to a British citizen.
    period. end of discussion. the laws at the time mean he was “born” a dual citizen. period.

    dual citizenship was addressed 4 times in history by the Supreme Court, and it has always ruled that a “natural born” citizen means both parents citizen.

    ergo: think he was born in Kenya = “birther” = nutjob.

    if u think the constitution meant something different then than it does now = Obama apologist.

    the issue is now moot. let’s move along.

    Thumb up +2

     
  44. Zonga

    February 13th, 2010

    V Woodchuck,

    Interesting links. I never thought it through.

    “… the Democrat leadership in Congress is supporting Obama because they want a weakened executive branch and Obama is an inexperienced, manufactured candidate…”

    Thumb up +1

     
  45. Vermont Woodchuck

    February 13th, 2010

    The old spy v. spy game: wheels within wheels within wheels. Remember one thing. There is no such thing as coincidence. A tough concept, but one needs to grasp it.

    Thumb up +4

     
  46. Elektra

    February 13th, 2010

    Hmmm. I finally see. Thanks for the info, Vermont. I have a serious PUMA gap. *nods

    Happy Bday! :)

    Thumb up +1

     
  47. Jayne

    February 13th, 2010

    Has anyone read the Free Republic piece on Obama not being a natural born citizen due to his father being a foreigner? That the founders did not want this situation due to the obvious conflict of interest? And that they wrote a grandfather clause to exempt themselves (since they were the founders and had to be exempted).

    This goes along with what reeko was getting at, but I don’t know why it would be a moot point? Just because Obama is already president? If we could get enough people interested, not let it die, and maybe eventually we would get it looked at. Then if it was decided by whomever makes these decisions, it would go to Supreme Court and invalidate all the laws O signed. Unlikely? okay, but possible and worth not giving up on just because it makes the left mad.

    Thumb up +6

     
  48. VaGal

    February 13th, 2010

    I am late commenting on this, but I agree that this could be expressed differently by Red State and others. Beck has done this, too. It may not be a good campaign platform for a conservative candidate, but there is no need to insult people for questioning his past. Aren’t we supposed to ask questions? Hasn’t that been the point of many conservative sites and shows like Beck’s? There are those who may have gone overboard with this, but to lump us all into one derogatory group does not help the conservative cause, either. It gives the left more fuel than the “birther” issue does.

    Thumb up +1

     
  49. VaGal

    February 14th, 2010

    Just to clarify, by “us” I mean those who would like to see not only a valid bc, but college transcripts, thesis, etc. There are greater issues to be addressed at this time, but it sure would have been nice if the press had been more interested in these things instead of rummaging through Sarah Palin’s trash.

    Thumb up +2

     
  50. forseti

    February 14th, 2010

    Many people justify their opinions with the facts and the law, whereas others do not let the facts and the law get in the way of their reasoning. Which one are you? If you are one of those people out there who thinks that the birthers are nuts, then let’s consider something that is not nuts — which one of the three burdens of proof applies to any candidate for President regarding his Article II eligibility? Is it by a preponderance of evidence? By clear and convincing evidence? How about by beyond a reasonable doubt?

    Once you decide which one applies, and you must pick one if your argument is to be credible, then consider this before drawing a conclusion — Although Hawaii calls the posted Certification of Live Birth an “official” birth certificate, it is nothing more than a digital copy of a summary of a 1961 vital record that derives from one of the six birth records procedures in place at the time of Obama’s birth, five of which arguably lacked adequate indicia of reliability and trustworthiness because they were fraught with the potential for fraud.

    Does anyone know which one of these procedures was used to generate a 1961 birth record for Barack? Barack won’t tell. Was it the one with a doctor’s signature and hospital documentation, or was it from one of the other five, one of which allowed a family member to mail in a form attesting to an at-home birth and receive a Hawaiian BC? Consider this hypo — state A issues a birth certificate to a person who supplies a hand-written note that claims baby B was born somewhere on so and so date. No independent witnesses are required. Later, the state issues an “official” scant summary of the “original” birth certificate.” The issue is, do you trust that summary? You can read the actual Hawaii Revised Laws in effect in 1961 at birther.com that would have allowed for such a thing to happen.

    To date, not one single solitary person in the three branches of government has bothered to subject Obama’s 1961 vital record to any meaningful scrutiny. Furthermore, they have not even identified which burden of proof was applied to reach their conclusions. They have instead chosen to accept his posted Certification of Live Birth, a summary, as conclusive evidence of his alleged birthplace simply because it reads -“Born in Hawaii.” It reminds me of someone who tells another, “Because I say so.”

    Now, for those on the Left who like to pretend that the birthers believe that the Hawaii newspaper birth announcement was planted so Obama could run for president 47 years later. Nobody on either side of the fence really believes that scenario. It is nothing but a ridiculous distraction from an alternative, plausible motive — the announcement could have been placed so Ann Dunham would have had documented evidence for immigration purposes should Barack’s birthplace ever be called into question by the INS when he was younger. Even if you are not willing to accept this scenario, in 1961 a family member could mail in a form attesting to an at-home birth and receive a Hawaiian BC. The state registrar would then send that information to the papers. So the Hawaii newspaper announcement is not reliable or trustworthy evidence either.

    On a closing note, assuming arguendo, that Obama is completely barred from getting a copy of his original 1961 birth certificate, what prevents him from either admitting or denying that his 1961 vital record on file at the DOH Hawaii is the one with a doctor’s signature and supporting hospital documentation?

    Thumb up +2

     
  51. mark

    February 14th, 2010

    AACCCHCHHHHHH … we’ve been birfer’d!!

    Thumb up +2

     
  52. Snowball the Sour Puss

    February 14th, 2010

    Whoa…two thumbs down for me. That’s a first.

    I like it!

    Thumb up +1

     
  53. Snowball the Sour Puss

    February 14th, 2010

    @Jayne – Thank you. You’re right, the BC is just another missing piece to the puzzle known as Obama.

    There is nothing crazy what-so-ever about wanting to see transcripts of our (shudder) president. All of them; from A to Z. Why are so many American – hell, too damn many – so strangely incurious about the man they voted for leader of the free world?

    And why do people like Erickson suddenly want to igonore the fact that these perfectly reasonable requests for answers concerning our (shudder) president are themselves being ignored?

    Good questions Jayne.

    Thumb up +5

     
  54. Jayne

    February 14th, 2010

    I almost forgot, my favorite line when confronted with anti-birthers: If Max Cleland can demand, and get, decades old paystubs proving Bush National Guard service, why can’t we ask for a few more relevant pieces of paper from the big O? Can you imagine if Bush had supplied digital copies of his paystubs with missing info! I think I’ll take a trip over to RedState and see if I can post that question.

    Thumb up +4

     
  55. reeko

    February 14th, 2010

    the issue is moot because… it is not that Obama is president, it is because 52% of the electorate supposedly voted for this lying ass in the first place. so, long after Obams is removed (regardless of HOW we remove him!) the scariest and largest threat to our country is that 52%.

    there will always be another Obama they idolize.

    Thumb up +2

     
  56. Jayne

    February 14th, 2010

    I think I got banned from Red State which I visited twice. After my post (in which I even said I think O was likely born in Hawaii, but the issue was his dad not his birthplace) I tried to go back and got a database “redigestation” error. Sounds like something from a horror movie.

    Thumb up +1

     
  57. Russia

    March 30th, 2010

    Hey very nice blog!! Man .. I will bookmark your blog and take the feeds also…

    Thumb up 0